Delhi High Court: NRI Husband Cannot Evade Indian Law by Staying Abroad

In Rajiv Tayal v. Union of India & Ors., 124 (2005) DLT 502: 2005 (85) DRJ 146, the Delhi High Court addressed an important issue concerning the jurisdiction of Indian courts over NRI husbands who evade legal proceedings initiated by their wives.

The case arose when an NRI husband filed a writ petition challenging the order of the Consulate General of India, New York, which had impounded his passport under Section 10 of the Passport Act, 1967, following directions from the Ministry of External Affairs (MEA), Government of India. The action was taken after the husband repeatedly failed to respond to summons issued by Indian courts in matrimonial proceedings.

In his petition, the husband also sought to quash the trial court’s order declaring him a ‘proclaimed offender’. He contended that, as he resided in the United States, appearing before Indian authorities would cause undue hardship. He further argued that he had not been properly served with the summons and suggested that the investigation should be conducted through a questionnaire sent to him abroad, instead of requiring his personal presence in India.

The Delhi High Court firmly rejected these arguments, observing that merely being abroad does not place an individual above Indian law. Acceptance of such a plea, the Court held, would effectively grant immunity to any accused who chooses to stay outside the country, thereby undermining the integrity of the Indian judicial system.

The Court also noted the husband’s deliberate non-cooperation, despite assurances from the court that he would be protected against arrest or other coercive measures. His insistence on hypertechnical objections, such as service of summons, revealed a pattern of evasion rather than genuine grievance.

This ruling underscores the principle that Indian citizens residing abroad remain subject to Indian law, and that passports may be impounded when an accused deliberately ignores court orders or fails to join criminal proceedings. It also highlights the availability of remedies for aggrieved wives under Section 10 of the Passport Act, ensuring accountability even in cross-border matrimonial disputes.